I'm with you there, but remember when they did make the playoffs in 2008 after winning a title 3 years earlier, the jist was making the playoffs isn't good enough.

In fact, I remember reading comments on some White Sox message board, I can't remember which, and the conversation was about the Braves making it 15 years in a row. The majority of the posters said the Braves won only once, just making the playoffs gets old.

....and that still makes it only 3 playoff appearances for this team since the league went to a 3 division and WC format 18 years ago and plus 2008 is now 5 years ago.

I am a Sox fan but a fan of another football team besides the Bears that has won it much more recently and that does strike me as a little sad that the 85 team is still worshipped like they won yesterday, but that was a one heck of a team, so I don't think it's all that pathetic really. They were one of the better teams ever for that one season. At least Chicago fans can remember when the Hawks, Bears, Bulls, and Sox won. Philly has that one Phillie's title to brag about after all these years, and nothing since 1960 besides that.

You forgot the Flyers AKA the Broad Street Bullies with a couple of cups in 74 and 75. The Sixers have a couple of Championships also.

__________________ Batting in the second position for the White Sox, number 2, the second baseman Nelson Fox.

That's true, forgot the Broad Streets with Bobby Clarke, and the Moses Malone, Dr. J , Toney Sixers of 82. I 'm losing it I guess. Still was a long time ago .

Sixers of '83.

__________________"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)

"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." — George Orwell

Teams overpay for home runs, at their peril.
Homers plus great clutch/average hitting in a player? By all means, give him 17+ mil a season.

It didn't work with Albert Belle, Thome was a disaster, and Dunn doesn't scare anyone with the game on the line.

Guys like this are a waste of resources. The '05 team was built on guys with middling contracts, varied skill sets, and something to prove.

The pitching was the focus financially.

This organization can't get out of its own damn way in regards to the power issue. For whatever reason, they cannot bring in players that can hit for power and average.

Um, those guys had GREAT years with the White Sox. The White Sox don't make the playoffs in 2008 without Thome. Now I will agree that the White Sox misallocate resources and in hindsight giving a big contract to a one dimensional DH who hits for a low average, strikes out 200+ times a year and is over 30 is bad idea. But Thome hit for power and average, Belle did too.

That's not entirely true. In the early part of the new century the Sox had a number of guys...Thomas, Ordonez, Lee, Konerko who'd all bash 25-40 home runs and hit between .270 and .320.

The problem is though hitters like that are scarce. To be able to get three, four, five of them in the same lineup at the same time takes some luck and probably a payroll today far beyond the Sox means.

Nowadays, it looks like teams are shifting towards quantity over quality in their lineup. You still need an anchor in the lineup, but it's more about the guys around that one guy. Recent world series teams have had that one big bat and 3 or 4 good bats that are good average/good power around him, just not exceptional. (Prince Fielder is still very good, but not on Cabrera's level.) Now with Konerko on the way down, we don't have that one big bat or the guys around said bat (Rios might be the only one). Dunn is too unreliable with average and strikeouts, and was a liability in big spots last year. Viciedo still has a shot, but is not there yet.
A lot of winning teams have also brought in good young guys to contribute, even on playoff teams. Todd Frazier (34th pick), David Freese (9th round), Allen Craig (8th round), Andy Dirks (8th round), Mitch Moreland (17th round) and Brandon Belt (5th round) all contributed on winning teams, without the need for high draft picks. The Sox have not been able to do that with hitters (they've had plenty of pitchers). I don't know if that's the guys we draft or the coaching, but I would like to see somethings change towards more balanced hitters.

Yeah, but then the act got old. We remember those teams- the 2000 Sox were the best example of how it COULD work.

After that, though, same crap different day. If the homer wasn't there, the team would struggle. Radke, Joe Mays, etc would just off speed them to death.
Every at bat was a clueless pull-chopper to second. FOR DAYS.

The Sox went about rectifying this ONCE. Out went Lee. In came a leadoff hitter with speed and something to prove.
Out went Valentin, and Uribe stepped in- a defensive move.

Willie Harris went to the bench, and they picked up a contact guy in Iguchi.

Carl Everett would change his stance in an 0-2 count to shorten his swing and put the ball in play. None of this "bailing and flailing" crap.

At the end of the day, pitching was the tale, I am aware. Without Contreras transforming into a stopper, the team would have collapsed. However, it was the first time that we ever saw the Sox look athletic and varied on offense.

It was a team not built as a "homer or nothing" outfit. It worked. Manufacturing runs helps you beat a pitcher who may be in command of his stuff. It gives you early leads and helps your pitchers relax. The players were focused on offensive fundamentals and timely hitting. Veterans that were brought in were acquired for having skills other than 40 homers, and I believe they ALL COMBINED cost less than Dunn.

The last five years have been marred with stupid trades, stupid contracts, and stupid teams that have no heart or concept of situational baseball. Despite themselves, they almost won a division last year in a HORRIBLY down year in the ALC.

I do agree that with the exception of 2005, it's been "home run or nothing" since 2000.

I honestly don't know if that's an unstated overall philosophy by the organization or players get to the Sox, know the reputation of the park and just say, 'the hell with it, I'm going for the downs...'

It was my opinion that Ozzie and his staff simply couldn't teach the players any other approach. Ozzie wasn't much of a teacher in the first place...but I know Robin and his staff have worked very hard at this, even up to this spring (i.e. fewer strikeouts, more contact...putting the ball in play) Once the bell rang though it was the same old, same old. (Dayan for example has abandoned that leg / timing move already...)

Maybe the players simply are baseball stupid in that regard. That's the only thing I can think of because it's not like a ton of these guys are coming up through the system...if they were then maybe you could ask if they are being taught wrong at the lower levels.

Maybe Daver can chime in on this with some comments on how the minor league system in general teaches Sox farm hands?

I do agree that with the exception of 2005, it's been "home run or nothing" since 2000.

I honestly don't know if that's an unstated overall philosophy by the organization or players get to the Sox, know the reputation of the park and just say, 'the hell with it, I'm going for the downs...'

It was my opinion that Ozzie and his staff simply couldn't teach the players any other approach. Ozzie wasn't much of a teacher in the first place...but I know Robin and his staff have worked very hard at this, even up to this spring (i.e. fewer strikeouts, more contact...putting the ball in play) Once the bell rang though it was the same old, same old. (Dayan for example has abandoned that leg / timing move already...)

Maybe the players simply are baseball stupid in that regard. That's the only thing I can think of because it's not like a ton of these guys are coming up through the system...if they were then maybe you could ask if they are being taught wrong at the lower levels.

Maybe Daver can chime in on this with some comments on how the minor league system in general teaches Sox farm hands?

Lip

While Ozzie wasn't much of a teacher he did emphasize at least making contact, not that Robin doesn't, but even in 2011 the White Sox were 13th in the league with 989 strike outs. In 2012 the White Sox were 6th in the league with 1203 strikeouts. I think one of the side effects of the increase in strikeouts was fewer weak infield grounders and popups.

I've never understood the concern that one of the reasons the Sox can't rebuild is because attendance will suffer- this team was in first place the majority of last year and they were one of the bottom few teams in attendance in the AL. I think that's more embarrassing than a "restocking" phase that would perhaps lead the way to a future with a homegrown core of quality players.

Sure attendance would be "worse" but I think its clear that Sox fans will not turn out for mediocre ball either.

If the 2005 pitching staff's perfformance was the same performance the Sox pitchers would have given from 2006 until now, there would have been several more playoff appearances. Saying they didn't rely on homers as much in 2005 is not accurate. They hit over 200 of them and scored via the homer as high of percentage as any other year.Take the WS. Game 1 homers by Dye and Crede. Game 2 homers by Konerko and Pods, game 3 homer by Blum. Game 4, score 1 run and win. That team scored 1 run and won at least 3 times. I really can't understand what some people have against home runs. If the Sox don't hit at least 200 of them, they usually lose more games than they win.

So based on results, you have a problem with every ownership the White Sox ever had. You probably also would have issues with just about every ownership group except for 2 or 3 in the league as not understanding the fans.

Yes, I had problems with every ownership the Sox had but I also saw good points. I have been a critic of the Reinsdorf group but even I saw it did good things. It established credibility quickly in the early 80's after the terrible 70's that produced only two stand out teams.

I am willing to go through the down periods as most fans. But I don't think one World Series appearance in over 50 years cuts it. Loyalty is a two-way street. Ownership can show that by having success on a more regular basis.

Finally, no team is entitled to attendance beween 2.5 and 3 million. The team has to do something to earn it.

Allow me one what-if. Leave everything the same - ownership, attendance issues, Ozzie/Robin, KW and Rick Hahn, cynical fans, etc, etc. Exact same philosophy throughout the organization. Exact same results and exact same same seeding in the amateur draft.

Change only one decision: Draft Mike Trout instead of Jared Mitchell.

Imagine the excitement last season had Trout been called up for May. Imagine the second half. Do they collapse in September?

Imagine the buzz leading into this season after the rookie season he had. The fans would be flocking into USCF. Well, relatively speaking for Sox fans.

Of course, there are 23 other GMs who made the same mistake. (Rizzo gets a pass- he drafted Strasberg) It's also possible he does not develop in the Sox system.